Suspect in Brentwood slayings makes court appearance in person

Related

Nothing in Matthew de Grood’s past behaviour foreshadowed the horrific events of April 15, in which he is accused to have fatally stabbed five students at a university year-end party, his lawyer said outside court following his client’s latest court appearance on Tuesday.

Thus, said Allan Fay, that is why the court agreed to order a 30-day psychiatric assessment to determine if de Grood, 22, was not criminally responsible for Calgary’s worst mass murder in history.

“A number of witnesses commented on his behaviour, what he was saying ­­— these sorts of things,” said Fay. “There’s no suggestion to support that this could have happened, not from what I’ve seen, not at all. Nothing about my client’s situation leading up to these events could have possibly indicated to anyone that something like this could happen. It’s called a psychotic break, as described to me by psychiatrists, in which a person has a break with reality and things like this can occur.”

De Grood, 22, who is charged with five counts of first-degree murder, appeared in person in a provincial courtroom packed with friends and family of the five victims. A two-week preliminary hearing was also set for March 2, 2015, to determine if there is enough evidence to go to trial.

He is accused of killing Lawrence Hong, 27; Josh Hunter, 23; Kaitlin Perras, 23; Zackariah Rathwell, 21; and Jordan Segura, 22, as they celebrated the final day of University of Calgary classes at a house party in the northwest community of Brentwood.

Crown prosecutor Neil Wiberg requested that de Grood be sent immediately to Alberta Hospital in Edmonton to undergo the 30-day assessment to determine his mental fitness at the time of the slayings. Provincial court Judge Frank Maloney then made the order.

“It’s an opinion that would be used at the trial. It’s not like fitness to stand trial, where if an accused is not fit, you can’t proceed,” Wiberg said outside court. “This is an opinion and it would be relevant at the actual trial.

“The preliminary hearing will proceed. regardless of which opinion the psychiatrist comes up with. Defence, of course, is free to come up with their own assessment, but that too would be just an opinion.”

Wiberg said there were two reasons why he requested the assessment: the fact de Grood has been certified under the Mental Health Act by a doctor; and a request by the psychiatrist that came back from the last court appearance on May 22, when he was found fit to stand trial, that recommended an assessment be done on the issue of whether he was not criminally responsible.

Wiberg said the issue of criminal responsibility will not be part of the preliminary hearing, as it is only to determine if there is sufficient evidence to send the case to trial, but will arise at trial.

Fay said his client is understandably apprehensive and nervous, which accounts for him smiling in the prisoner’s box during the brief hearing, as he has been under medical treatment and has been receiving anti-psychotic medication for several months since his arrest.

“I think he has a clear understanding of what is going on at this point than he did when he was arrested. I’m quite sure of that,” said Fay. “Obviously, the impact of it is quite daunting and he’s doing the best he can.

“(Smiling in court) is more a function of the medication he’s on. He’s definitely eager to please. While that might put some people off, it’s not for a moment that he doesn’t take this seriously and feel for everyone involved.”

Fay said even though a psychiatrist may come to the conclusion that de Grood was either criminally responsible or not, ultimately a judge or judge and jury will have to make that determination.

He said he could waive the preliminary hearing and go directly to trial, but says he wants to “have all my bases covered.”

“I want to go through the whole process,” he said. “This is an extremely important matter and extremely complicated matter and I want to make sure everything is done by the numbers.”

This was the first appearance by de Grood, son of Calgary police Insp. Doug de Grood, since he was found fit to stand trial. Fay said at that time that being found fit to stand trial only meant his client could understand the process and instruct counsel, but he could still be mentally ill.

Being found not criminally responsible is a finding separate from a guilty or not guilty” verdict.

Although someone found not criminally responsible isn’t guilty of an offence, they can be confined indefinitely in a secure psychiatric hospital if they pose a danger to society.

The Criminal Code requires provincial mental health review boards to conduct annual assessments to determine if a patient should remain confined or can be safely granted a greater degree of freedom.

De Grood will be back in court on Aug. 29 to speak to the psychiatric assessment.